|
ADMINISTRATION
finds a specific mention in his grant.1 The names of the other desas comprised in the
Traikutaka kingdom, viz., Maharashtra, Rishika (Khandesh) and Lata (Central and
Southern Gujarat) do not occur in the records of the Traikutakas. The next lower
administrative unit was the vishaya corresponding to the modern district. This term
was current over a very wide area, Viz., Gujarat, Konkan and Maharashtra. Gujarat
was, for instance, divided into a number of vishayas such as the Sangamakhetaka,2
Antarnarmada,3 Nandipura,4 Antarmandali,5 Akruresvara,6 Bahirika,7 Karmaneya,8
Treyanna9 and Kasakula.10 Some of the vishayas seem to have changed their names
in course of time. Thus. when Broach attained a greater importance as the capital of
the Gurjaras, the name of the Antarnarmada Vishaya was changed to the Bharukachchha
Vishaya.11 From Konkan we have the Vishayas Trikuta, Palludhamba, Amraraji, Mairika,
Mahagirihara12 etc. North Maharashtra had such vishayas as Nasikya13 and Bhoga-
vardhana.14 Sometimes vishaya was used as synonym for desa. The Kanheri plate, for
instance, mentions the Sindhu vishaya in the sense of the province of Sindh.15 Similarly,
the puri-Konkana vishaya, mentioned in the Anjaneri plates,16 signified the province of
Konkan. Our records do not state the extent of these vishayas except in the case of Puri-Konkana, which is said to have comprised 14000 villages. Puri-Konkana, however, was a
desa rather than a vishaya. Other Vishayas must have been much smaller in size. This is
also indicated by the number of vishayas into which Gujarat and North Konkan were divided.
A vishaya was subdivided into smaller units which were generally called aharas in
Central India17 and Gujarat, and bhogas in Maharastra. Thus we find that the Nagendra
ahara comprised the territory round modern Eran.18 Several more aharas are mentioned in the
records from Gujarat, e.g., Iksharaki,19 Lohikaksha,20 Treyanna21, Kanhavala22 and karma-neya.23 In the south the Nasikya vishaya of Maharashtra probably comprised the Vatanagara
___________________
1No. 9,1.2.
2No. 19, 1.9; No, 20,1.9.
3No. 11, 1.4.
4No. 22, 1.17.
5No. 8, 11.2-3.
6No. 16, 1.33; No. 17, 1.33.
7No. 27, 1.16.
8No. 29, 1. 21; No. 30, 1. 38.
9No. 26, 1.20.
10No. 34, 1.9.
11No. 23,1.11.
12N1.31,1.27.
13No. 28, 1.14.
14No. 12, 1. 18.
15No. 10, 1.2.
16No. 31, 1.23.
17That an ahara was a sub-division of a Vishaya is evident from the explicit statement in the Navsari
plates of Sryasraya-Siladitva (No. 27.1.16) that the Kanhavala ahara was included in the Bahirika vishaya.
to convey just the opposite Perhaps the intended statement there was Treyann-ahara-Vishay-antarggata-.
Cf. NO. 29, 1.21 and No. 30, 1.38.
18No. 119, 1.4.
19No. 9, 1.8.
20No. 24, 1.35.
21No. 26,1.20.
22No. 27, 1.16.
23No. 29, 1.21 and No. 30, 1.38.
Home
Page |
